Oakland city council president Jane Brunner attends a City Hall news conference by police chief Wayne Tucker to announce his resignation. Tucker cited his lack of confidence in the council as his reason for stepping down.

Oakland's State of the City address on Monday night was supposed to be a festive event where Mayor Ron Dellums highlighted his accomplishments, identified the city's priorities and provided a sobering plan about what would be needed to achieve them in the coming year.

But because Dellums has no accomplishments to highlight - and no comprehensible plan for the coming year - the annual address quickly devolved into a public referendum on police conduct - and an uninvited confrontation with reporters about the job status of Oakland Police Chief Wayne Tucker.

To say the least, if Dellums had a theme, it was lost in the chaos that converged around him.

A little more than 12 hours after the mayor's office and a Police Department spokesman vigorously quashed the rumor that Tucker had resigned, the mayor's office called a Tuesday morning news conference to announce that - you guessed it - Tucker will resign.

The hastily convened media event was organized only to avert another 11th-hour disaster: Council President Jane Brunner and three colleagues were poised for a 12:30 p.m. news conference to announce their intention to take a vote of no-confidence of Tucker's job performance.

It's the kind of fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants operation Dellums has run since Day One.

If there is anything to be learned from the mayor's actions in the last three days, from his weak effort to hire Robert Bobb as city administrator to his State of the City address that led to the flurry of questions surrounding Tucker's resignation, it's that Oakland's mayor should not - indeed cannot - be allowed to lead any longer.

He pretty much confirmed it by yielding to the council threat and the simple fact that he has no power base - or constituency - to fire back.

Dellums not only lost the crowd Monday night, but his instinct to defend Tucker and challenge the council members' action failed miserably. In the end, Dellums submitted to their will. Now that council members know that the threat of a public confrontation is enough to make Dellums back down, they can own him.

Dellums will be forced to back down every time because he has no policy proposal to offer and no constituency to back him.

It makes no difference whether Tucker fell on his sword to protect the mayor's office or resigned at Dellums' request, the mayor showed he could be collared quite easily - and I hope the council took heed. Faced with a challenge from a unified council majority, Dellums gave up in a big hurry.

Rather than gloat, Brunner again avoided any appearance of conflict, saying she believed that Tucker resigned without pressure from the mayor's office. It's also a tactic that could be used again, depending on the policy issue before them, she added.

"I think we will deal with it issue by issue and use the tools that we have," she said of the council's future dealings with the mayor's office.

There isn't anyone in Oakland who watched the mayor's address Monday night who didn't come away thinking the city is in trouble and in dire need of leadership. And those numbers include the four City Council members who attended the event.

When you take in all that's happened in Oakland over the last eight months, from the messy dismissal of former City Administrator Deborah Edgerly to the discovery of huge financial losses in city coffers to a string of scandals emanating from the Police Department, it's obvious that Dellums can no longer be allowed to make decisions about finances or personnel - or anything else for that matter.

The council should wrest power from him right now - veto every inane policy idea, cancel every attempt to install another crony, and issue a vote of no-confidence in the mayor every time he resists.

In the spirit of collegial conduct and cooperation, elected officials from Oakland, San Francisco and state government have offered advice, expertise and personnel to help Dellums establish himself as Oakland's leader.

He has failed to take advice or help and he cannot make a decision on his own. He has shown time and time again that he is either unwilling or incapable of fulfilling his duties within any reasonable time frame.

If Brunner can lead the council to support her efforts to hold Dellums accountable, Oakland has a chance of surviving his four-year term. If they allow him to continue to set the tone of government and the pace of operations, he will do to this city in four years what it took former President George W. Bush eight years to do in the nation's capital.

Using veto power, having the threat of a no-confidence vote and generating public interest and support for reform efforts are some of the ways the council, as members or a group, can contain the damage and cancel the mayor out of the big decisions affecting this city.

They should use these tools to ensure that Dellums stays away from any policy matter dealing with the social or institutional health of this city.

Whether the mayor or any of his staff realizes it, Dellums not only lost the crowd Monday night, but he abdicated his power to the City Council members, and they should never give it back.